News
Blue Origin continues SpaceX-competitive rocket R&D with hot-fire engine tests
Prospective SpaceX-competitor Blue Origin is continuing research and development work in earnest in an effort to push its first orbital-class rocket, known as New Glenn, closer to the massive vehicle’s launch debut.
In early August, the company shared a video showing a small segment of a long-duration hot-fire test of the rocket engine that will power New Glenn’s second stage, the upper segment of the rocket tasked with placing payloads (typically satellites) into their final orbit(s).
Recent footage of BE-3U demonstration engine hot fire. Two BE-3Us will power upper stage of #NewGlenn & deliver our customers to orbit. We’ve completed over 700 seconds of test time & confirmed performance assumptions used for final BE-3U expander cycle design #GradatimFerociter pic.twitter.com/ygJlgHkyE1
— Blue Origin (@blueorigin) August 10, 2018
Blue Origin recently announced an intriguing decision to change the upper stage engine its New Glenn rocket will use, moving from a vacuum version of the booster’s massive BE-4 engine (BE-4U) to two updated and modified BE-3 engines, the same propulsion system that powers the company’s much smaller New Shepard suborbital rocket. Rated for roughly 110,000 pounds of thrust (compared to Merlin 1D’s ~190,000 lbf thrust), a duo of the vacuum-optimized engines would be expected to produce roughly the same amount of thrust as SpaceX’s Merlin Vacuum (MVac) upper stage engine.
Before BE-3U took its place, Blue’s original plan was to fly New Glenn as a full-up liquid methane and liquid oxygen (methalox0rocket) on both first and second stages, simplifying the vehicle’s fluid systems and the launch pad’s own ground systems. By replacing BE-4U with BE-3U, the company is instead choosing to make New Glenn’s first stage methalox while the second stage will use liquid hydrogen and oxygen (hydrolox).
-
- A likely dated mockup of New Glenn at the LC-36 launch pad. (Blue Origin)
-
- Blue Origin’s aspirational future, the highly reusable BE-4 powered New Glenn rocket. (Blue Origin)
-
- Blue Origin’s BE-4 engine, the propulsion for New Glenn, seen conducting hot-fire tests in Texas. The engine’s nozzles is a full 6 feet (~1.8m) in diameter. (Blue Origin)
-
- BE-3U seen testing at Blue Origin’s Texas facilities in August 2018. (Blue Origin)
Blue Origin certainly does have more experience flying hydrolox rockets thanks to its suborbital New Shepard program, and BE-3 is also a mature engine as a result. However, the decision is still difficult to parse. Critically, the company chose to significantly change a fundamental aspect of the rocket engine, moving from a combustion tap-off cycle to an expander cycle, where “cycle” refers to the mechanisms used to pump fuel and oxidizer into a rocket engine’s combustion chamber.
Changing cycles is a fairly dramatic revision and consequently diminishes the value of what might be called “flight-heritage” hardware, or rocket components that have been extensively tested and proven during actual flight operations. Noting one of the main points Blue Origin itself has made in the past and on its own website, it should come as no surprise that New Glenn’s launch debut is believed to have slipped from 2020 into 2021 or even 2022, originally reported by Reuters earlier this month.
“With extensive testing and use on New Shepard and the BE-3, the BE-3U will be one of the best-understood rocket engines before it ever launches into space [on New Glenn].” – Blue Origin
New Glenn’s debut delays will likely push Blue Origin’s first lunar Blue Moon landings beyond the original 2023 launch target. Regardless, a considerable amount of work thus lays before Blue Origin before they will be ready to seriously compete with the likes of SpaceX, Arianespace, and ULA on the global launch market.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
News
Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.
Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.
The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.
Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.
The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”
That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.
The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.
Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world
